What if we apply Lie Detection principles to a short post? Can we know the truth?
Statement Analysis: Letting the subject guide us to the truth.
Question: Is Jeff Carter a victim of a hate crime?
"Woke up to this" is to avoid telling us who woke up and only by implication did the unknown person wake up to a vandalized damaged vehicle.
The subject would like his audience to believe that what happened was:
a. a surprise or shock
b. took place while he was sleeping
He does not commit to either, via his dropping of pronoun. The need to distance himself from this, is his priority #1.
He has another priority, which is his narrative or message, but principally , the need to persuade readers into believing this was a shock to him because he was asleep is not only unnecessary information, but it is self preservation. It is to anticipate readers thinking, "he could not have done this because he was asleep." Yet he does not tell us "I was asleep" or even "I awoke to find..."
The subject is familiar and comfortable with this form of deception: counting upon others to interpret his words, rather than listen to him.
Statement Analysis is trained listening.
Sub priority: message
It is here we we see affirmation of the analysis of "woke up..."
Next, "My atheist bumper sticker is gone" now introduces his priority. It is "his" priority to first introduce a connection to himself.
Instead of the intrusive criminal destruction of property, he is able to discern and mark as his priority that a bumper sticker has been removed.
It is not just a bumper sticker, but the additional language unnecessarily tells us the message carried by the sticker is "atheist."
If you saw your vehicle defaced and its damage acute, would you note what was not present? The damage to his vehicle will be, in the least, time costly. What does it cost to get another bumper sticker?
Note that a bumper sticker removal is a quiet more passive action, while defacing property in this manner is something that is intrusive, invasive and tense: one must rush not to get caught if one is engaging in criminal activity. This increases tension of destroying property.
Analysis Conclusion: Fake Hate
This poster is deceptive about what happened to his vehicle. He ejects himself from the opening statement (no "I") which is to void the responsibility for the action. This is affirmed by the implication of being asleep. One must be asleep in order to awaken. Yet, he avoids telling us that this is him.
This is to conceal responsibility of this defacing of his property. He either defaced it himself, or he knows the identity of the defacer. Either way, it is "guilty knowledge" of the event.
This poster is narrative driven. He is deceptive about what happened, divorces himself from the statement, while leading his audience to believe he could not be responsible because he was asleep.
It is interesting to note: he does not lie overtly in the statement.
We often find guilt within projective messages.
His hatred of Christians is evident in his attempt to implicate them, yet even here, he posts it as a question, rather than a direct lie. This is consistent with his self preservation of the dropped pronoun "I" which began his short statement.
An analyst also noted that the subject went on in other posts to blame US President Donald Trump in defacing his vehicle and posted rants of hatred and intolerance.
It is easy to dismiss one as in need of mental health intervention, but consider the historical examples of falsely blaming religious groups for criminal behavior and what it has led to.
This is an example of extremism to inspire hatred of a particular group by the subject. This is the type of individual of whom may be inspired to commit crimes that Hollywood celebrities seek to inspire with words of violence.
Nero, Hitler, and...
A "false flag" is as old as history. Attempting to blame a particular group falsely, to inspire hatred and violence, is found in every era. Blaming a religious group is also seen in precedent, including the blaming of Jews in Nazi Germany, to rouse the populace into violence.
That the subject was willing to go this far (criminal behavior) is indicative of the risk he poses to society.
If the subject made a police report, he could be charged with filing a false report.